the presiding officer: the senate will come to order.

mr. schumer: now, mr. president -- the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i have the happy duty of ask unanimous consent that the senate consider the following nominations en bloc -- it is a lot of numbers, so i'll read them slowly for the sake of being transcribed. 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105,

106, 107, 1010, 111, 112, 113, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 1356, 1357, 138, 139, 180, 182, 183, 1834, 185, 186, 187, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 199, 200, 201, 203, 204, 205, 224, 225, 226, 227,

228, 229 -- am i -- is that too as fast? is that all right? 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 248, 283, 284, 285, 286, 287, 289, 290, 291, 293, 294, 295, 296, 325, 326, 327, 330, 331, is 332, 336, 337,

339, 340, 342, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 351, is 282, -- 382, excuse me. 382. 383, 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 389, 390, 391, 392, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 422, excepting colonel david j. berkeland, colonel benjamin r. johnson, colonel john w.sanis, colonel andrew o.sozlof, capital brian

anderson, scott a. kane, paul d.moga, brigadier general lawrence g. ferguson. that the senate vote on the nominations en bloc, with no intervening action or debate, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table -- the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, that the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. the question is on the nominations en bloc. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nominations are confirmed en bloc. mr. schumer: now, mr. president, today hundreds -- hundreds -- of military families across the country can breathe a sigh of relief. the senate has now unanimously

confirmed hundreds of military nominations that were held up for ten months by a single person, the senator from alabama. thank god, these military officers will now get the promotions they so rightfully earned. i'm happy that after so much unnecessary delay by one senator we have finally moved forward and given these men and women the promotions they deserve, and we will work to confirm the rest of the nominees that were on hold very soon. while today's confirmations are good news, these holds should never have happened in the first place. unfortunately, resolving this impact -- impasse took too long, risking our national security and throwing the lives of so many military families into discombobulation. i am glad this pointless and gravely damaging ordeal has

finally, finally ended. now, let this incident be a warning. no one -- no one -- should attempt this in the senate again. the senior senator from alabama has nothing to show for his ten months of delay. no laws changing in any way except for the damage he did to our military readiness and the pain he caused to military families. if every senator did what senator dubberville tried to do and held up military -- senator tuberville tried to do and held up military confirmations because of this or that issue no matter how deeply felt, it would grind the senate to a halt, it would be a catastrophe for our military, holding up military nominations was an unsuccessful and risky strategy in this instance and should never, ever happened again. i want to thank my colleagues from both sides of the aisle who

spoke out in defense of our military families. i want to thank particularly senator reed, the chair of the armed services committee; senator klobuchar, the chair of the rules committee; and i really want to thank senators ernst and sullivan for their courage in helping break the logjam after so, so many months. for all those who played a part in bringing this impasse to an end, thank you -- thank you. it took patience, it took resolve, but we have emerged on the right side of where we should be. i yield the floor. mr. reed: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. reed: mr. president, i am rejoicing in the orders that senator schumer read. the first thing i would like to do is apologize to the hundreds of officers, men and women who

have dedicated themselves to their country and also to their families for this unusual, shall i say, disruption of their promotions to ranks they have won through their merit and effort. i think also, too, that it's important to note the contribution of senators sullivan and ernst and young and graham and others. they recognized that military officers are not political pawns, that they are men and women who've dedicated themselves and their families to service, to defend, to protect the constitution of the united states. and so they joined in to ensure that today we could have this

much-delayed promotion on the floor of the united states senate. now, once again, mr. president, we have to recognize in the future we can never do this again. that these men and women served their lives -- decades. they serve it with courage. they serve it with integrity. they serve it with decency. they do it for this country, not for political party, not for a cause or a popular emotion. they do it to defend the country. and they're aided every step of the way by their families, by their spouses, by their children. in fact, these spouses and children make as much, if not more, sacrifices than the soldiers, sailors, airmen,

marines, guard, in my view. so let us commit that as we go forward we shall not view a soldier in the context of a political dynamic but in the context of his or her quality of service, her integrity, her decency and, above all, they're not only solemn obligation but complete life of preserving and defending the constitution of the united states. and with that, mr. president, i would yield. a senator: mr. president, more than two million venezuelans cast their vote in support of the official opposition candidate for the upcoming presidential elections. mr. scott: these brave

venezuelans participated in this election at great personal risk. they did so united bid their dedication to ridding venezuela of the brutal oppression brought on to them and return freedom and democracy to their country. this is a significant moment in the venezuelan people's fight for freedom and true representative government, something i've been fighting alongside them to achieve for years. it is imperative that the united states stand with them, recognize the duly elected presidential opposition candidate. and lead the international community in doing the same. the national primary commission is to be commended for its ability to successfully organize and carry out the opposition primary election despite facing numerous obstacles, threats and attacks from the maduro regime. the work of the national primary commission advances the cause of freedom in venezuela and represents the best interests of its citizens. it also is in our national security interest and the best

interests of all who strive for peace, liberty, and stability for nations in latin america and across the western hemisphere to recognize and support the fundamental role the commission is carrying out in venezuela. the united states must use this opportunity to put the full weight and power of our nation behind the cause of freedom in venezuela. our national security depends on us being strong in this moment. however, we cannot act from a position of strength while negotiating with a murderous, dishonest, and tyrannical dictator. i # -- i have attempted to negotiate with ma daughtero -- maduro on how and when he will leave power. we need to -- that the administration has offered to the maduro regime, that is the only way to make sure that maduro and his thugs will see no easing of sanctions until free

and fair elections are held and democracy returns to venezuela the gone conditions are met, number one, machado should be represented on the opposition delegation of the venezuelan led negotiations in barbados, number two, maria machado is allowed to run as the sole presidential candidate in the 2024 venezuelan election, number three, are the release of all political prisoners, including all u.s. citizens held by the maduro regime. number four, election observers are allowed to witness the illegitimate maduro regime permitting -- the european union, the international republican institute and the national democratic institute to ensure that the ee lockerral process is free and transparent.

recognize the votes that the votes of the 2024 venezuelan election. after machado's win in 2023, we are seeing nicholas maduro and their thugs threatening and harassing and attacking the national primary commission and everyone who voted for her. the maduro regime's supreme court declared the suspension of all effects of the venezuelan primaries. we must all see this for what it is, a clear sign that maduro's true intentions is to never give up his power or allow freedom to return to venezuela. sanctions on maduro, further, empowering the regime, prolonging oppression and genocide and propping terrorism

and narco trafficking in the region. president biden has an historic opportunity to be a part of the recovery of democracy in venezuela and to stand up for freedom and democracy, values that define us as americans. i'm here today to ask unanimous consent for the passage of a resolution where the senate recognizes machado as venezuela opposition candidate and leading the charge against maduro. it is not easy, maduro's regime have tried to prevent machado from participating in the election of 2024, rejects the illegitimate efforts to carry out fraudulent presidential elections by borrowing the opposition candidate chosen by the venezuelan voters, demands that the illegitimate maduro

regime permits the international republican institute and the national democratic institute and to release all political prisoners, including all u.s. citizens, denounces effort by the maduro regime to persecute members of the national primary commission, calls on the united states government to institute greater pressure and tighten sanctions against the maduro regime. this is common sense, more importantly, it's the right thing to do for america's national security and unapologetic support for freedom and democracy for all people. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to address the senate in spanish. the presiding officer: without objection. [speaking in spanish ]

[speaking in spanish ] mr. president, i am thankful for my colleague from florida, senator rubio, i ask all of my colleagues to adopt this important legislation today, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the consideration of investigation 486, i ask that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there

objection? mr. cardin: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: reserving the right to object. first, i want to thank my colleague from florida for bringing this issue to the floor. i have spoken frequently about the tragedies of the maduro regime, the protracted political, economic and human rights crisis caused by the maduro regime, millions of venezuelans have left their homes, the maduro regime is under investigation for crimes against humanity and the lists go on. i chair the senate foreign relations committee. this is a resolution that should go through our committee. our committee should have an opportunity to review and offer suggestions as to what should be included and how it's worded, and minor reason alone i would have concern about how it's moving forward. let me add a few more parts to this. i support the administration's efforts to pursue diplomatic

engagement by leveraging u.s. sanctions, the administration has empowered the opposition in its negotiation to this regime. we impose sanctions so that we can get changes of actions to those we impose the sanctions against. when we see progress in that regard, we should be willing to modify or eliminate those sanctions. on october 17, the maduro -- there was an agreement for more competitive presidential elections next year. by supporting this agreement, the biden administration has provided political speech to hold primaries on october 22. the results were resounding as my colleague from california has pointed, maria machado won the opposition primaryies. this is the kind of progress that has been needed to restore

progress, they have undermined the results of the primary. we're not surprised by that. the biden administration has made it clear, that maduro doesn't allow the candidate to run, they will reimpose the sanctions, that is how it should work, if if doesn't wrongfully detain americans, we will snap back our sanctions. we made that clear. we want our political prisoners and wrongly detained americans released immediately, we want to ensure there is a competitive election in venezuela and if not, we will reimpose our sanctions. and i have called for these competitive elections. as i pointed out this resolution has not been considered by the senate foreign relations committee. it comes as negotiations remain under way and initial advancements have taken place. it seeks to dictate action to the administration a sense -- as sensitive diplomatic negotiations are ongoing, the biden administration has stated

publicly it will reimpose sanctions if the maduro regime does not follow through on their commitments. we don't trust them. believe me, we don't. we had the opportunity to reimpose those sanctions, we must maintain the diplomatic space needed to advance democratic elections, our objective is to get democratic elections. so i would suggest to my colleagues submit his resolution for consideration to the senate foreign relations committee that's why we have the senate he foreign relations -- foreign relations committee. give us a chance for those who have been working on this venezuelan issue for a long time, give us an opportunity for input. that's how the system is supposed to work. ive give my -- i give me colleague the assurance, i want to taken up and passed on the floor of the senate with regard to venezuela and i will work with my colleague in that regard and for the reasons i stated,

mr. president, i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. scott: so i thank my colleague for his comments about making sure that we get are free and fair elections in venezuela. it sounds like a procedural issue, it doesn't appear to be an issue over the substance of the resolution and i look forward to the markup for this important resolution. hopefully we will get to the point where we have free and fair elections. hopefully all of the things that both of us care about will happen. thank you, mr. president. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: mr. president, shortly we will be voting on elizabeth richard to be the state department's coordinator for counterterrorism, the motion in regards to invoking cloture. and i speak in favor of her nomination as the chairman of

the senate foreign relations committee. we need someone at the helm of our civilian and diplomatic efforts in counterterrorism who has experience in working in dangerous and challenging environments, we need someone who can implement the department's counterterrorism perhaps and can work hand in hand with the department of defense on counterterrorism issues. we also need someone who has proven they will stand up for american values. the threat from terrorism has not gone away, but has changed dramatically. not only has terrorism spread across more countries, but today it takes on a different form. protecting our nation from the evolving counterterrorism threat is absolutely critical to the security of the united states. that is why we must have an experienced leader at the helm of the bureau of counterterrorism and why we must confirm ambassador richard without delay. ambassador richard has over three decades of experience in

foreign service. she has served as the deputy assistant secretary in the bureau of near east affairs at the department of state, as deputy chief in yemen, as border coordinator in tax and spend and -- koor made iter in pakistan. she has led efforts with our partners and allies to confront the challenges from terrorist groups. ambassador richard's nomination was reported out of the senate foreign relations committee by a voice vote. she has overwhelming endorsements from some of the most experienced and senior national security officials from general vottel, a retired four-star general command x -- commander of central command -- to retired major general fontas of the u.s. army cybercommands,

all endorse her candidacy as does the former assistant secretary general of political affairs of the united nations for near east affairs for the horn of africa as hassan patterson -- as hassan patterson. i could go on. she has -- ambassador richard has earned the support because of her long career. we all speak highly of her ability and qualifications to lead the department's counterterrorism policy. as one said is she is among the finest diplomats our nation has produced. i have confidence she will lead this position with distinction and she has the skill, knowledge and capacity to meet the challenges that lie ahead. i urge my colleagues to support her nomination.

with that, mr. president, i would yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cruz: i ask unanimous consent that i be allowed to speak for up to 30 minutes so my colleagues and i can participate in a live unanimous consent prior to the scheduled roll call vote. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cruz: mr. president, i rise today in support of free speech and in support of a.m. radio, it is widely enjoyed by americans across the country, over 80 million americans listen to a.m. radio every month, they rely on it. and, yet, earlier this year we saw eight major automakers announce that they were stripping a.m. radio from new cars and trucks, taking away the option of a.m. radio for consumers. that decision, i believe, was a serious mistake. a mistake that would hurt texans and that would hurt americans in

all 50 states. as a result, i joined with my colleague, the senator from massachusetts, ed markey, in introducing legislation, a.m. radio for every car act. i would note that senator markey is one of, if not, the most liberal senator in this chamber, and i am one of, if not, the moss conservative senator in this chamber. i not recall another bill we're have joined forces and it speaks to the power of this issue that you see such deep agreement across ideological lines. when senator markey and i introduced that legislation, within days one of the eight major car companies, ford motor company, reversed course and announced they would now include a.m. radios on new cars and trucks. i think they viewed this coalition as a sign of the

apocalypse. i would note that this bill has overwhelming bipartisan support. it has 44 cosponsors, 22 democrats and 22 republicans. when we took it up in the commerce committee, it passed out of the commerce committee with overwhelming bipartisan support. and why is that? because on the merits, this bill is the right thing to do for the american people. number one, in times of disaster, a.m. radio is the single most reliable medium for communicating about a natural disaster. i remember whether hurricane halve yif hit my home city of houston and the entire texas gulf coast. the enormous challenges. people relied on a.m. radio when other forms of communications go down, a.m. radio is consistently the most resilient to help people get out of harm's way, whether it is getting out of the way of a hurricane or getting out of the way of a tornado or getting out of the way of a forest fire or any other

disaster, a.m. radio is there to help people know where to go and how to keep their families alive. but secondly, a.m. radio is particularly important for rural america. texas has enormous quantities of our state that is rural. and in rural america, there are many parts of texas, many parts of other states where farmers and ranchers, the only thing they can get is a.m. radio. and when they're out on their farms or ranches, they rely on a.m. radio for whether reports -- weather reports, crop reports, for news, spoke sports, for entertainment. taking away the option for rural america of a.m. radio is bad, bad for farmers and ranchers in america. but number three, diversity. a.m. radio promotes a diversity of use. why? because the barriers of entry to getting into a.m. radio are relatively low. to start an f.m. station is quite expensive. an a.m. station is much cheaper

to start and to operate. and a consequence, we see a beautiful array of diversity of views reflected on a.m. radio nationally. there are 296 a.m. stations that are owned by hispanics. nationally, there are 138 a.m. stations that are owned by african americans. nationally, there are 104 a.m. stations that are owned by asian americans. nationally, there are 14 a.m. stations that are owned by american indians or alaskan natives. nationally, there are four a.m. radio stations owned by native hawaiians and pacific islanders, and nationally there are 385 a.m. radio stations that are owned by women. if we want diversity of views, a.m. radio is critically important. and i would note the support for this bill is broad and far ranging. seven former fema directors have called for the senate and the

house to pass this bill as soon as possible saying that, quote, the a.m. radio for every vehicle act is critical to ensuring federal, state, and local officials can keep the public safe. that sentiment was echoed by multiple emergency response organizations, such as the international association of fire chiefs, big city emergency managers and the national association of -- association of counties. all 50 state broadcaster associations have called on congress to pass this bill. in addition to media groups, including the national association of black-owned broadcasters, the national urban league, and oca, asian pacific and american advocates, the bill's received the support of many agricultural and livestock groups, and the aarp has likewise shared their support for this bill noting that, quote, adults age 50 and above represent the largest share

of a.m. radio listeners, but that also represents those at most risk from disaster events. this is a bipartisan bill that makes sense, that preserves consumer choice. mr. president, this bill should pass easily. and yet it's not going to pass this afternoon. my friend, the senator from kentucky, is my understanding intends to object. and i would note that one aspect of a.m. radio is particularly important to texans and to the citizens of kentucky and the people all across this country which is a.m. radio is a haven for free speech. a.m. radio is a haven for people to speak, even if their views are disfavored by the political ruling class. talk radio is an oasis for conservative speech. rush limbaugh would not exist without a.m. radio. the views of my friend, the

senator from kentucky, would be heard by many fewer people without a.m. radio. whether mark le vin or sean -- levin or sean hannity allow free speech is important, i believe these automakers stood up to remove a.m. radio as part of a broader pattern we see of censoring views that are disfavored by big business. i think this is consistent with what big tech has done, silencing views they disagree with. and so this bill is all about preserving consumer choice. letting consumers decide. if you don't want to listen to a.m. radio, turn it off. but you know what? if the automakers all come together and say you can't turn it on because we're not growing to put it in your car, we're not going to put it in your truck, you don't have the right to choose what you will listen to. i think that's profoundly harmful for our country, profoundly harmful for free

speech. and so i hope this body can actually act in support of americans in harm's way in a disaster and support of farmers and ranchers who rely on a.m. radio and in support of a diversity of views speaking online and in support of free speech for whatever your views, whether they're right wing, left wing, or no wings at all, a.m. radio let's people speak and make the case in john stewart mills marketplace of ideas. accordingly, mr. president, as if in -- actually, before i do this, i would like to yield to my colleague from massachusetts. okay. accordingly, mr. president, as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 2308 -- 208. s. 1669, further that the committee reported substitute amendment be agreed to, the bill as amended be considered read a

third time and passed, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. paul: mr. president the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky mr. paul: reserving the right to object. there is a certain amount of irony in seeing republicans come to the floor proposing mandates on business. to republicans picking winners and losers. mandating that all cars have a.m. radio is antithetical to any notion of limited government, and has nothing to do with the debate over free speech. the debate over free speech is whether or not government can place limitationson free speech. it has nothing to do whether you have a right to have your opinion in the "new york times" or you get to listen to radio, really has nothing to do with the debate over free speech. the debate over free speech as listed in the first amendment is that government shall pass no law. it has nothing to do with forcing your manufacturer to have a.m. radio.

this legislation attempts to insert congress' judgment into a question best decided by american consumers. this isn't about consumers turning on or off the radio. this is about consumers deciding which car they want to buy, what they want to pay for it and what they want as extras in the car. americans families are already struggling, and this bill is yet another private sector mandate that would cost car buyers even more money. this bill mandates that a.m. radio be included in vehicles manufactured in the united states, imported in the united states, or simply shipped in interstate commerce. what happens when government places mandates on the private marketplace? consumers pay more. to provide a.m. radio in electric cars, manufacturers must include equipment to counteract the electromagnetic interference between the battery and a.m. radio waves. the equipment necessary to fix this problem at a minimum costs several hundred dollars per vehicle. according to the consumer technology association, even a

small automotive productive line would incur costs above $15 million to comply with this mandate. the sponsors of this legislation know this bill will increase costsfor car buyers. -- costs for car buyers. that's why they included a provision that prohibits car makers from charging a fee or an additional payment for access to a.m. broadcast stations. so it's not just a mandate that you have to have a.m., it's a mandate that you can't charge for a.m. radio. it's more than one mandate on car manufacturers and it will add to the cost of the car. what's sure an interesting thought, they think they're going to prevent this by saying the car manufacturer can't charge for a.m. radio. but people will still pay more for the cars. if the mandate is opposed, one way or another, people will pay for this cost. it just doesn't disappear. whether angry consumers then complain about the ever increasing cost of cars, the plow points of this -- proponents of this bill will shrug their shoulders and say don't blame us. we passed a bill that forced car

companies to incur additional costs and we told them they weren't allowed to charge you and they did anyway. when the government imposes costs on manufacturers, government inevitably imposes costs on consumers. no bill can shield consumers from the higher cost imposed by government. and congress already imposes significant costs on all taxpayers by forcing the many to subsidize the few who own electric cars. electric car vehicles make up a small but growing percentage of vehicles on the road. they comprise about 2% of all vehicles and nearly 6% of the vehicles sold last year were electric. most of these electric cars are subsidized by the taxpayer. if you want to get to the root of this problem, if you don't want government subsidizing something that bans your favored form of entertainment, quit subsidizing them. so i have a great deal of sympathy for a.m. radio. i love a.m. radio. but i don't want to give up on our philosophy and just say because it's something we like,

we're going to mandate it. if you want to get to the root of the problem, quit subsidizing the car manufacturers, wait subsidizing electric cars if they're going to disfavor our speech. that's a way of encountering speech and promoting speech that doesn't involve giving up on our principles that mandates on business are not a good idea. the electrical vehicle tax credit forces all of us to subsidize the small number of electrical car owners. this subsidy by incentivizing the purchase of electrical cars does threaten a.m. radio. you want to really get rid of this? quit subsidizing electric cars. so instead of attacking the crux of the problem here, though, this legislation adds a government mandate to force car manufacturers to install a.m. radios and increase the price of cars. do we seriously not see the folly of this exercise, particularly from a conservative point of view? let me be perfectly clear. government intervention in the economy cannot be the solution to problems caused by government

intervention in the economy. we have this problem because government subsidizing these electric cars. we're going to fix it by mandating some other government rule. one mandate does not cancel out another and will not make the situation better. at some point we have to remember that we are members of congress, not the central planners of automobile industry. with that in mind, i offer a solution to get the government's foot off the neck of taxpayers. let's let the free market decide where consumers can operate. let's let people without subsidies, without coercions, without the government getting involved, let's let them pick. you want a car with an a.m. radio or an electric car without an a.m. radio? but let's don't subsidize one of the other. rather than mandate the installation of a.m. radio, let's stop subsidizing the purchase of electrical cars and the removal of a.m. radio. let's let the consumers tell the manufacturers through hundreds of transactions a day what their preferences are.

so i ask unanimous consent to strike the mandate imposed by this legislation and empower car buyers by modifying the request forward to replace the text with my language that would repeal the electric vehicle -- electrical vicar tax. so -- vehicle car tax. i would ask the senator to modify his request and the paul substitute amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to, that the bill as amended be considered read a third time and passed, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there an objection to the modification? mr. markey: reserving the right to object the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts mr. markey: i thank you, mr. president. my friend from kentucky is attacking a bipartisan bill with overwhelming support on both sides of the aisle. when i started in the united

states congress, one of the main operating principles under which we were able to make progress on big issues and it went back to president kennedy and lyndon johnson and sam rayburn was the austin-boston connection, working together, texas and massachusetts, to make progress where we could. that's what this legislation is today. center cruz -- senator cruz and i agree that we have to ensure that for public safety reasons, that a.m. radio stays in the vehicles that americans drive. as senator cruz said, millions of americans use am radio. not only is the senator from kentucky proposing to strike our

bill but also to actively harm american drivers and american workers, and we're going from win-win to lose-lose for american drivers. the electric vehicle tax credit helps people drive cheaper cars while driving american manufacturing. electric vehicle sales are soaring. investments in new manufacturing capacity related to electric vehicle supply chain also increased by more than 100% to reach $35 billion in a single year since the passage of the tax credit. in total, since the passage of the inflation reduction act, more than 84,000 new jobs have been announced in the e.v. sector. in fact, most of the largest single federal investment in the auto industry is going to senator paul's state of kentucky. new federal loans for three battery manufacturing plants are expected to create 5,000

construction jobs, 7,500 operation jobs, all to build batteries for ford and lincoln electric vehicles. my friend, i would hope, would want kentucky to be the home of those new jobs, new economic energy driven by the tax credit and i'm sure other states would be interested in stepping in. we have union workers who have secured an historic victory over the big three with their recent strike. there have been clear -- they have been clear that the electric vehicle revolution, which is kickstarted by the tax credit, can be an engine for good-paying union jobs. so let's not pump the brakes giving drivers the freedom to buy cheaper, cleaner vehicles. let's not pump the brakes on new jobs in states across the country, including kentucky. and let's not pump the brakes on ensuring that drivers and

passengers can receive alerts during emergencies. am radio is the backbone of fema's emergency response system. it allows emergency responders and, if necessary, the president of the united states to communicate with the public during the most dire of circumstances. in just the past five years, fema has invested more than $150 million to harden 77 radio stations across the country to withstand natural disasters, emergencies, and even a nuclear electromagnetic pulse. these stations are equipped with backup generators and other tools to stay online in the worst conditions and fema has specifically chosen stations that would allow the president to communicate with more than 90% of the public. and those stations include bbza

from super-storm england to the recent wildfires in maui when other channels went down, broadcast am radio stations, especially those 77 hardened stations, they remained on the air. and despite its immense importance to our emergency response system, broadcast am radio is under attack from automakers. over the past few years, car manufacturers have increasingly removed broadcast am radio from their vehicles, arguing that am radio is outdated and unnecessary during emergencies. well, senator cruz and i know that that is not accurate. and that's why a year ago i sent letters to 20 automakers requesting additional information about their plans for broadcast am radio. and what i learned that eight

companies had removed broadcast am radio from their vehicles, senator cruz and i, we teamed up to introduce the am radio for every vehicle act, which would direct the national highway transportation traffic safety administration to require automakers to maintain broadcast am radio in their vehicles. we now have 44 cosponsors from across the political spectrum, split even lay between republicans and democrats. we have built this broad coalition because this issue of access to am radio is about public safety. and don't take our word for it. all year the emergency response community has been sounding the alarm about the removal of broadcast am radio from vehicles and urging lawmakers to pass our bill. in fact, every former fema administrator since the clinton administration has endorsed the am radio for every vehicle act. so have groups representing the local emergency response community, including the

national emergency management association, and international association of emergency managers and international association of fire chiefs and big city emergency managers and earlier this year fema warns that, quote, millions of people could be prevented from receiving critical life had saving information if am radio are not included in automobiles and called the removal of am radio stations a public safety crisis for the united states. the current fema administrator has warned that the removal of am radio would have a significant impact on the emergency alert system. so while automakers may argue that cell phones or streaming services can replace broadcast am radio during emergencies, the emergency response community, the experts actually responsible for responding to emergencies are universal arely saying just

the opposite. they are saying that am radio is important, that cell service often goes down, as we saw in hawaii, that the key to an effective emergency alert system is redundancy. what do you want to listen to? the automakers with the financial interest in removing am from their vehicles or the experts warping that this is is a crisis? every single day that passes is another day in which automakers put cars on the road without broadcast am capabilities, putting their drivers and their passengers and their families in jeopardy. in matters of safety, we can't compromise. we have to listen to the experts when it comes to our national security. and i urge my colleagues to stand with the tens of millions of am radio listeners and the emergency response experts and

support the am radio for every vehicle act, which senator cruz and i have introduced. and with that, a mr. president, i object. the presiding officer: is there objection to the earlier request? a senator: i request. the presiding officer: objections are heard. the senator from texas. mr. cruz: i want to respond to the arguments raid the by senator. the senator from kentucky suggested that free speech has nothing to do with the hangs of private companies censoring citizens, and i'm going to suggest that is a very cribbed version of free speech. the senator from kentucky argued all we should care about is government restrictions of speech. but apparently that means there is no role to do anything to protect free speech rights from big tech companies that censor and silence and deplatform voices they disagree with, that abuse their monopoly power to silence voices.

i'll tell you, i have been proud to earn supports from libertarians across texas and across the country and it is a strange libertarian view that supports big-tech censorship of free speech. being a libertarian does not mean being an anarchist, and i would suggest there is a role for government rules and regulations that are liberty-enhancing and choice-enhancing and that's what this choice is. the senator from kentucky said, well, consumers can just choose to turn on the am radio. well, no they can't. if you have eight automakers working in concert to that i can that choice away from them. this is all about giving them that choice. secondly, i would say the senator from kentucky suggested that consumers would pay more. mr. president, the status quo is am radio is in the cars and trucks right now. and it's not just electric vehicles the carmakers are pulling it from. it's every vehicle, including

internal combustion vehicles. this is about stripping consumer choice and killing am radio. i hope the majority leader will schedule this bill for a vote because if he did, it would pass with an overwhelming vote on the floor of the senate. and i hope the senator from kentucky will reconsider because this bill would have passed today were it not for two words from the senator from kentucky -- i object. that is the only reason this bill senior senator has not passed. with that, i yield to senator lujan. the presiding officer: the senator from new mexico. mr. lujan:: thank you, mr. president. i want to recognize the leadership of my completion from texas and -- my colleagues from texas and massachusetts. bringing attention to something that doesn't impact our daily lives until we need it most. when there's often an emergency, as there was in new mexico about two years ago when the world's attention was on our beautiful state and we suffered the worst

fires in our state's history. now, these were forest fires that received so much attention in our state, because they were started by the federal government. how you might ask? these are prescribed burns that got out of control. now, when cell phones were not working, when other methods of media were not able to connect because power lines were going down, there was one local radio station, kmnx, an am station in las vegas, new mexico, that was streaming more and more news, volunteers coming in on their time off, radio personalities ensuring that people would know what was happening because they were being told to evacuate from their homes. folks driving home from work in rural areas, as senator cruz points out, where there's no other news connectivity, no other information coming in. we depend on am radio.

i just don't understand why there's opposition to this. i was hoping senator cruz and senator markey a i'd come to the floor today to celebrate the passing of this important legislation. not to sit and listen to that objection. just to point out that local news reported, predominantly through am radio, and in new mexico because of the fires, we heard from the fema administrator, from administrator griswald, who said, quote, am radio is one of the most dependable ways that we can reach individuals across this country to get warnings out there. we saw this play out firsthand in new mexico. and as we've been reminded, this is not just a challenge in my state or in texas or in massachusetts but in every one of the 50 states across the country.

the federal government should be doing more to make it easier for americans to access potentially lifesaving emergency broadcast. plain and simple, with natural disasters happening every day in every state, i wanted to clarify a few points, some of which i heard today. one, i have heard a claim that the am for every vehicle act will force manufacturers of electric vehicles to completely redesign the drivetrain. i heard a little bit about that today. here are the facts. the fact is that car companies have already solved this engineering challenge. we've already heard of the number of companies that have come forward with the 20 letters that senator markey sent out, 10 companies responded, honda, hyundai, niece san, still lanties, subaru and toyota that they've already figured this out.

brilliant engineers at those companies figured this out. one of the folks that are objecting to this are flying rocket ships. i would argue, they have some of the most talented energies in the world working for them. challenge them to solve this challenge, as the other ten companies have. sometimes it just means insulating some cable a little bit more, not because it impacts the vehicle, because there might be a little bit of static come in. i'd rather have a little static and receive the lifesaving information than not have being a seas to it. -- than not have access to it. i've heard that the am for every vehicle act will increase costs for new vehicles by thousands and thousands of dollars by these vehicles. well, again, ten companies have already figured this out and they're making it happen. but heros the concern i have -- i see access to am radio as a lifesaving feature.

important information that we all depend on. i heard that seat belts would be too costly, but that was being put forth as a requirement in vehicles to help save people's lives. when there was a conversation about air bags saving people's lives, i heard and i read that it was too expensive, that that shouldn't happen. we don't need air bags in vehicles. when we were all debating about the inclusion of backup cameras to prevent the deaths of little kids in cars, there are many saying it is too expensive, it cannot be done. i'm very concerned that when it comes to moving this technology forward, the same tired excuses are brought forward and this body has a chance to be able to get this done, and i hope we can see something put on the floor here soon because more and more vehicles getting on the road without am radio are jeopardizing the life and safety of our constituents. the last thing i'll say is this, and this is with a conversation

from a small radio owner in new mexico out of santa fe out of kswv, and i was speaking to him before i came down. and he was reminding me, mr. president, about the core physics of electromagnetic spectrum around am. you touched on this, senator markey. it's everywhere. as a matter of fact, kob, a station in albuquerque, new mexico, they touch a little more than half the state with their broadcast. it's pretty incredible what this spectrum can deliver in our communities and we should maximize the reach of emergency alerts over am radio and wireless networks. the physics and the electromagnetics of this are plain and simple, and that's why i certainly hope that we can get this done. i have so much more to offer, mr. president, and senator cruz. i was going to offer it into the record because the argument is strong, it's compelling, we've got to get this done, and i hope we will see some floor time to get this done because it could

mean someone's life in our community from getting the information that they have to get out of a community or out of their home because of tornado or hurricane or fire is on them. no more excuses. let's get it done. i yield back. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to bring to a close the debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 144, elizabeth h. richard, of virginia to be coordinator for counterterrorism signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of elizabeth h. richard of virginia, a career member of the senior foreign

service, class of career minister, to be coordinator for counterterrorism with the rank and status of ambassador-at-large should be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote. vote: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

the clerk: mr. barrasso. mr. bennett. mrs. blackburn. mr. blumenthal. mr. booker. mr. boozman. mr. brawn. mrs. britt, mr. budd. ms. butler. mis-cantwell. mr. carper. mr. casey.

mr. cassidy. ms. collins. mr. coons. mr. cornyn. mr. cornyn. ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. m ernst. mr. fetterman. mrs. gillibrand. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty. ms. hassan. mr. hawley.

mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. mr. hoeven. ms. hirono. mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson. mr. kaine. mr. kelly. mr. kennedy. mr. king. ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. ms. lummis. mr. manchin. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. mendendez.

the clerk: ms. baldwin. mr. mullin. mr. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reid. mr. ricketts. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn. mr. risch. mr. romney. ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. rubio.

mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer. mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen. ms. cinema. ms. smith. ms. stabenow. mr. sullivan.

mr. tester. ms. stabenow. mr. sullivan. mr. tester. mr. thune. mr. tillis. mr. tuberville. mr. van hollen. mr. vance. mr. warner. mr. warnock. ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden. mr. young.

mr. warnock. the clerk: ms. baldwin. the clerk: ms. baldwin. the clerk: ms. baldwin.

senators voting in the affirmative -- baldwin, bennet, butler, cantwell, carper, casey, coons, gillibrand, heinrich, kaine, king, klobuchar, lujan, manchin, marquee, mendendez, merkley, murray, padilla, peters, rosen,

schatz, smith, stabenow, whitehouse, wicker. the clerk: senators voting in the negative -- barrasso, boozman, cruz, lummis, paul, rubio, vance. mr. kennedy no.

the clerk: mrs. capito, no. ms. ernst, no. mr. fetterman, aye. mr. scott of south carolina, no. ms. duckworth, aye.

the clerk: mrs. hyde-smith --

mrs. hyde-smith, no. mr. cotton, no. the clerk: mr. ricketts no.

mr. murphy, aye. mr. booker, aye. mrs. blackburn, no. mr. budd, no. mr. kelly, aye. mr. blumenthal, aye.

mr. hickenlooper, aye. mr. crapo, aye.

the clerk: mr. hawley, no.

the clerk: ms. collins, no.

the clerk: ms. hirono, aye. mr. schumer, aye.

the clerk: mr. brown, aye. mr. scott of florida, no. mr. durbin, aye.

mr. rounds, aye. mr. risch, aye.

the clerk: mr. tillis, aye. mr. wyden, aye.

the clerk: mr. hoeven, no. mr. cornyn, aye. mr. marshall, no. mr. warnock, aye. mr. schmitt, no. mr. reed, aye.

mr. sullivan, no.

the clerk: mrs. shaheen, aye. mr. lankford, no.

the clerk: mr. braun, no.

the clerk: mr. young, aye. mr. johnson, no.

mr. sanders, aye. vote: the clerk: mr. hagerty, no. mrs. britt, no.

the clerk: mr. mcconnell, aye.

the clerk: mr. tester, aye. mr. ossoff, aye. ms. warren, aye.

mr. grassley, no. mr. cardin, aye. the clerk: mr. moran, aye.

the clerk: ms. hassan, aye.

mr. daines, no. mrs. fischer, no. ms. murkowski, aye.

the clerk: ms. cortez masto, aye.

the clerk: mr. thune, no. the clerk: mr. tuberville, no.

the clerk: ms. sinema, aye. mr. warner, aye.

the clerk: mr. cramer, no. mr. romney, aye.

the clerk: mr. lee, no. vote: the clerk: mr. welch, aye.

the clerk: mr. van hollen, aye.

the clerk: mr. cassidy, no.

the clerk: mr. mullin, no.

the clerk: mr. graham, aye.

vote:

vote: vote:

the presiding officer: on this vote the yeas are 6 3, the nays are 37 and the motion is agreed to.

mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. all opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar 352. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. all opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination.

the clerk: nomination, the judiciary. richard e.n. federico of kansas to be united states circuit judge for the tenth circuit. mr. schumer: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 352, richard e.n. federico of kansas to be united states circuit judge for the tenth circuit signed by 17 senators as follows. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum calls for the cloture motions filed today, december 5, be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to legislative session, be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i have two requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have approval of the majority and minority leaders.

the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. schumer: finally, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today it stand adjourned until 10:00 a.m. on wednesday, december 6, that following the prayer and pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed. that upon the conclusion of morning business, the senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the rayes nomination. further, that the cloture motions filed during yesterday's session ripen at 12:30 p.m. finally, that if any nominations are confirmed during wednesday's session, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: if there is no further business to come before the senate i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until senate stands adjourned until

the senate gaveling out after the u.s. district court judge r washington d. voti to limit debate on elizabeth richard state department coordinator for counterterrism. the senate was also able to approv more than 400 military promotions by unanimous consent after alabama senator tommy turberville agreed to withdraw his hold he began nearly 10 months ago. over his objection to the pentagon abortion policy. off the floor classified briefing on the war in ukraine with a top defense and intelligence officials. vice president kamala harris aching history today when she cast her 32nd tie-breaking vote in the senate to announce surpassing nearly 200 record who served as vice president to jon quincy adams and andrew jackson. while the senate live here on cspan2.

>> the president of harvard university, university of pennsylvania massachusetts institute of technology testify on combating anti-semitism on college campuses at a hearing before the house education workforce committee. you can see it tonight at eight eastern on cspan2 c-span our free mobile video app or online at c-span.org. if you ever miss any of c-span's coverage you can find it any time online@c-span.org. videos of key hearings, debates and other events of each are markers that guide you to interesting and newsworthy highlights. these points of interest markers appear on the left-hand side of your screen when you hit play on select videos. this timeline makes it easy to quickly get an idea of what was debated and decided in washington. scroll through and spend a few minutes on c-span's points of interest. ♪ a healthy democracy doesn't just look like this.